Fall, Caesar: Day Five

Your possible targets:

Beau
Geoff
greekhouse
inkarnit
nettebarr
yickit

I’m still thinking through scenarios on how to fix quick-draw voting. Favoring those in power might be a good way to go, though that still forces us to establish an order.

Nothing’s coming to mind other than the last kill being able to choose, and yes, they’re biased, but this might introduce the right kind of strategy, and not the wrong kind.

Advertisement

240 thoughts on “Fall, Caesar: Day Five

  1. Ok, I’ve got to go soon. And seeing that DG influenced AMR last time, that seems like a good idea.

    SO AMR AND I VOTE FOR GREEKHOUSE.

  2. Group of 8:

    So we have a problem. DP and KG both have their votes locked. We have two options:

    1. Vote Greekhouse out as planned. We then must turn on each other next round.

    2. Go along with them and vote out Yickit. That would give us Dread Pirate and KG to vote/influence tomorrow.

    • I’ll defer to the rest of the group, having already tossed a vote on Greek, since I was trying to be quick.

      Alright, I’m away for the day! See you all tomorrow morning!

        • You are only being made the target because they voted for you. You are the only possible other option than greekhouse. If we vote greekhouse we are voting against each other next day no matter what. If we vote for you, we can then eliminate DP, greekhouse, or kg next and hopefully stack some to get 2 or 3 of them in a row. It sucks for you for sure though. I am undecided what way to go here and therefore have not cast my vote yet. I guess it depends on how I think things would go next week if we kill greek.

          • This is true. If you think the group will stay together fine. Doesn’t seem like there is much going that way though lately. I’ve made my moves, so I can’t really do much at this point.

          • It appears to me that the group would stay together but… I don’t like betraying people. That is kinda the name of the game though… or at least the website. WHAT DO I DO!?

    • My opinion – Yickit started the game with two non-votes which is what (even though I earned a non-vote this morning) I was planning to use as my argument once we had to turn on each other – i was going to argue that Yickit or Novack (also with 2 non votes) should be the first to go. Maybe we just have to start that earlier than expected? I definitely prefer the ability to remove DP and KG moving forward and keeping the 7 of us together.

      Thoughts?

  3. Well Novak, they’re already planning to turn on you. If you join us tomorrow we only need one more person to form a new majority. If Beau or Geoff get to the end you guys know they’ll win anyway.

  4. I think I may have found the angle for avoiding too many speed votes. Each person is allowed just two or three Influence attempts for the entire game. Would that have kept some of you from coming out firing each time?

    • It might have kept me from using influence every time, but I probably still would have voted right away.

      Actually given my number, I probably would have used influence anyway.

      2 or 3 seems like a really low number considering we still have 8 rounds to go after this one.

      • I kind of like the idea of having a relatively low number of influences. It makes them a valuable resource. That varies the game instead of having the same strategy every time.

        • I can see that.

          Given that influence is almost the only way to figure out card numbers, limiting that aspect seems like it just takes the cards out of the card game.

          • Well, even in this game we only have four known cards of the 11 players remaining.

          • I think three per person over the course of the game is quite a few, particularly if the in-person games are more likely to start with 6-10 people than fifteen.

          • If you do limit, I would think it would have to be tied to the number of players.

            3 influences in a 8-player game (6 rounds) is different than in a 15-player game like this one.

        • I’m with you here, Kage. I think three is the max I want to allow, but I could add something like “for a more chaotic game, add to the max Influences.”

          We will of course play out this game as it’s been played so far.

    • I feel like some sort of punishment for a failed influence would be appropriate. What if a failed influence meant that the other person got to pick your vote? Or that you couldn’t vote for the person you tried to vote for?

  5. Annette, Colin, Geoff.

    We get to choose who goes out, not only in this round, but probably the next few as well. I feel like it’s in our best interests to work together here toward whatever we think is the ideal outcome.

  6. I’ll be heading out to work in a little over a half hour. DG has editing privileges. Do I need to get them to anyone else in addition?

    Obviously, this will be the last “day” today. We’ll start at the usual time tomorrow. To field yickit’s comment about this being a difficult start time, it would be a hell of a thing to change now, though in the future we can talk about the optimum start time for games where time is of the essence.

  7. I can’t speak for KG, but if yickit goes tonight, then I’ll go after nibbish tomorrow out of deference to new-found allies (any of DG, inkarnit, nette, or Geoff) who helped with the vote.

  8. Alright, guys, I’m off to work. While I can’t get to the spreadsheet there, I can get to this site so I’ll field questions if I must.

    If this thing ends in a tie, here’s how it’ll work. Rather than wait ages for each person to respond or not to the tiebreaker, email me saying “If the tiebreaker comes to me, I choose to [kill X, kill Y, or abstain and let it fall to the next person]. Cool?

  9. Here are my thoughts:

    I have no allegiance to Beau other than respect for him getting an initial group together.

    I have no allegiance to Yickit nor novack for their early multiple non-votes.

    I do have allegiance to the other 4 team members – Inkarnit, Nibbish, DG, and Nettebarr

    I do not like the “quick vote” aspect of the game and I have no problem leaving those who did quick vote in trouble for having done so.

    At this point I think it makes the most sense for the 4 of who have not voted to vote inconsequentially (split between Beau, Colin, Nette, and myself) and let the 4 greekhouse voters go up for the next round.

    At that point I am happy to consider my self “aligned” with this group of 4 late votes plus any DP and KG if they would like to so consider.

    Thoughts?

    • I kinda feel the same as you, but along with that is the allegiance to people such as DG and Annette, who both think voting for yickit makes the most sense. I see the arguments for all sides though.

      • DG and Annette can decide for themselves if they want to join or avoid the majority. I either vote for an original 8 team member and put myself in the majority and *possibly* avoid becoming a target or I vote inconsequential hope to gain some new allies and *possibly* make myself a target sooner down the road than I otherwise would anyway. I’ve got to make the best play for myself.

    • My only question is whether the new alliance gets us anything that the old alliance doesn’t offer.

      Perhaps this nucleus of four is enough to make that work, although since we’re doing this in the open, we will have to work to make that group safe.

      • The fact that this nucleus of 4 is invulnerable next round is pretty strong. No one could vote for us even if all 7 decided they should. But I don’t think it would be us against 7. There would be people that want to vote with us. I think Nibbish would be smart to stay with us holding the wine card and I know DP would like in too even if no one else did.

      • Like I mentioned above, there would be factions of 4, 4, and 3… and the other 4 that isn’t our 4 would have all 4 up for elmination, making the next round 4, 3, and 3. Sure, 3+3 > 4 but I would hazard a guess that some of each group of 3 would rather work with us than against us.

    • I’ll add though that I don’t think the quick voters should be left out to dry. We had determined last round that greekhouse was the target. Along with that, though, was that we needed Beau to influence DP in that vote so we would have a target next round too. DP was quicker than Beau in this case which changed the entire scope of the round. So the quick votes for greekhouse were actually the initial plan that got screwed up a bit.

      • We can argue the right or wrong of whether they should be left to dry – the fact is Im not in a position to snipe as soon as the new post is released so I am at a disadvantage when voting early is the best move – I have no problem (and actually think its good for the game) to be able to to turn that advantage into a disadvantage.

        What do I gain if I vote Yickit? I’ve already outed my intention to move against Novack and the group of 8 is thin if not ready to implode here soon. I gain nothing and put myself at risk.

        I vote inconsequential and yes it may cost me with some jury members if I get to then end – but it may get me jury respect as well. Most importantly it leaves me safe and gives me at least as much and possibly more alliance forward than what I have now.

        Is any of my logic there flawed?

        • No, none of your logic is flawed. I don’t think anyone’s logic is flawed here to be honest. Each options has its merits. They all could work. But who are we most afraid of and which option gives us the best position to eliminate that person or persons?

        • If you vote yickit, you gain a few days where the original alliance chases down DP or kg instead of trying to get our votes into a majority.

          If you think that isn’t worth as much as what we gain by not being vulnerable in the next vote, that’s a discussion, but it’s not as if voting yickit gains us nothing.

          • I agree 100% – I think the 4 of us being untouchable and saving Yickit (along with DP and KG from the majority) has more value than putting ourselves into the majority and killing Yickit.

          • I guess it depends on influences after the next round but… it seems to me it’s the same amount of immune time one way or the other. Voting yickit is a vote to betray whereas voting inconsequentially is a safe vote to kill greekhouse. If you want to go as long as possible before betraying someone, option b is better than option a. I think the possibilities of success are similar regardless.

          • It sounds like we need to hear from yickit here. I would think yickit would join us, making it a group of 5 since we saved him from the alliance that was willing to kill him. A group of 5 against two groups of 3. One of those groups of 3 has a dead member next round too… making it 5 allied against 5 non-allied.

          • Not to mention, voting Yickit right now still leaves us greek, as well as DP and KG to focus on. That’s three rounds before we have to move on each other.

          • Not necessarily Annette. If we can’t force one of them to vote for the losing person each round, we have to turn on each other anyway. And Geoff could force the hand here. He voted inconsequential. How does that impact the possibilities now? I know we can still kill greek or yickit, but does his vote change how things play out afterwards at all?

      • I don’t want to punish those specific individuals who voted quickly. I want to introduce the possibility of quick voting being a bad move into the game.

        My allegiance to DG is that he was part of the original 8 and has voted every time and has not made an obvious vote to avoid the majority. In other words he has been a more consistent and honorable player than I have so far. (Although in my defense my missed vote was due to being up past 1AM working and not waking up at 7AM in time to vote)

          • However – Yickit non voted the first two votes of the game.

            Novak non voted twice when he was participating in the conversation and had “agreed” to vote with the group.

            Those both bothered me – but I said nothing at the time waiting to bring it up when it was time for the 8 to turn inward – this quick voting dynamic of the game hastened that.

        • I have also been in the majority every time and have voted in favor for our group without hesitation. In fact, my quick vote this time is essentially what you implied I should do when the previous round ended.

          Not that it means you should ally with me. Obviously new parties have to form now.

  10. Ill put it out there – while I can see Beau being an easy target next round because of his point value – I do respect him organizing the original group of 8. I would support voting for Novak next round (assuming we let the current 4 Greekhouse votes be the majority)

    • If Greekhouse is eliminated, then I agree to vote Novak in the next round. That puts me in danger of elimination the round after that (provided Novak is eliminated), but I would hope you all would view it as a sign of good faith and continue to work with me.

  11. I’ve made my arguments – here is my admittedly inconsequential vote to hopefully start the dominoes to end today.

    I VOTE FOR INKARNIT because he won’t vote for himself so no way he can get to 4 votes.

    • Okay… so we still can’t finalize this without Brooks then. If I vote Greek, we have to wait for Brooks. If I vote yickit, we have to wait for Brooks. I think I’m going to wait for Brooks…

  12. If we throw our votes does a tie change anything?

    It certainly takes longer to figure out who’s dead. It also makes things more interesting as to who is vulnerable tomorrow.

    • More importantly though, does that help or hurt our chances? We would not be actively saving yickit so he is less likely to want to be our friend and we are not actively saving greek so he is less likely to be our friend too. And would the original alliance stay our friend since we didn’t throw in with them?

          • If you kill greekhouse then you have Will and I as allies. Yickit would probably be pretty happy about it. Plus all of the people that you’re upsetting by openly considering stabbing them in the back will be up for the vote. I just call ’em like I see ’em.

  13. I’m getting donuts and chicken. So I’m out for a while. I hope brooks and the earliest Colin choose the other fella. Either way I’ll be back in a bit.

  14. Like I mentioned, I will vote Novak in the morning (should inkarnit kill Greekhouse here). Please join me if you believe in liberty!

  15. A quick scan of the conversation shows me that Geoff is attempting to line up future targets, and is using whatever convenient reasoning is at hand. He’s latched onto people who have 2 non-votes, since that excludes him. It’s a pretty bogus reason (though admittedly no more bogus than the fact that 8 of us happened to be around at the right time on day 1 to set up a group) given the chaos that is these days. My first non-vote came when we were discussing whether I should use influence to create a second target on day 1 and a couple others swooped in and removed that option. My second non-vote came today when I was attending a church service for my deceased sister and missed an entire “day”, so… yeah. I don’t favor voting anyone out for missing votes when things have happened so quickly.

    That said, I’ve been a team player throughout. I used my influence to target both Free and DPWY. Meanwhile, Geoff has been anything but. I think you should all leave me alone tomorrow, but even if I go out next, everyone, target Geoff at the first opportunity.

    • Before today I always voted with the group except the one day the vote was done before I was even out of bed. How have i not been a team player?

      How do you explain your two non-votes – both of which I recall you being part of the conversation so you were around to vote – it appears to me you conveniently just waited too long to vote – if I am wrong please let me know.

      I do give you credit for using your influence twice to help the team.

      I am open to reasons to not vote for you tomorrow – you have heard my arguments for why I think people should vote for you.

      (If this is over the line strategy talk forgive me – I won’t post anymore until tomorrow morning)

  16. Looks like greekhouse has been eliminated. Everyone email Kelly with your choice of who you would like to kill if your number comes up (or if you would like to abstain from changing your vote).

  17. greekhouse is still dead, right? Hard to follow without the spread in front of me, but was it 5-4-1-1-1 or something?

    Anyway, I’m thinking 9am AND 10:30 if another thing like today happens (Bret was assassinated today. TODAY. Does that even seem possible anymore?) but I’m thinking it’ll be more complicated than that; tomorrow I work at 1 Central so that would probably be it even if we get to two days done, though we’ll play it by ear.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s